BERNADETTE CAHILL

"I
hope that all Women start paying attention and get behind their
representatives and senators to have a quicker chance to ratify it." --Pinky Hayden of Blowing Rock, former state legislator

A
bill introduced recently in the United States Congress, if it becomes
law, could remove legal objections to North Carolina's ratification of
the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). The National Council of Women's
Organizations, the National Organization for Women, the American
Association of University Women and the National Women's Political
Caucus are among 25 organizations endorsing the bill.

H.J.
Resolution 47, which Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) introduced on
March 8---International Women's Day---removes the deadline that killed
the ratification process in 1982 after 10 years. The House referred the
new bill to the Jidiciary Committee.

Alice
Paul wrote the original Equal Rights Amendment, said Carolyn Cook,
executive director of United 4 Equality, a Washington-based group
lobbying for the deadline's removal. Paul's national campaign between
1913 and 1920 led to the 19th Amendment guaranteeing women the vote.

The
ERA states: "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex."

When
first introduced by two Republicans in 1923, the ERA Paul had written
had no time limit. Congress imposed a seven-year restriction in final
passage to the proposing clause of the 1972 amendment resolution, said
Cook, but not in the amendment itself. Congress later extended this by
three years.

By
1982, 35 of 38 required states had ratified, but the ERA was considered
dead. Some states have used the deadline to argue against considering
ratification.

In
North Carolina--one of 15 unratified states--23 bills of different
types addressed constitutional equality of the sexes between 1972 and
1982. The ERA received one positive vote only, in the General Assembly.

The
deadline has resurfaced because the Madison Amendment, ratified in
1992--203 years after its initial submission to the states--has raised
questions about the validity of a ratification deadline. Legal opinion
states a strong case exists for the continuing viability of the ERA
based on this precedent.

"I
am thrilled that they have introduced this bill to Congress to allow us
to go forward with the ERA," said Pinky Hayden of Blowing Rock, the
High Country's representative in 1982 in the North Carolina General
Assembly when the ERA failed the last time. Hayden has called since 2008
for ratification.

"It
makes total sense to me that we won't have to start at ground zero
again. I hope that all women start paying attention and get behind their
representatives and senators to have a quicker chance to ratify it,"
she said.

Getting
three more states to ratify is known as the Three State Strategy. The
removal of the deadline is now part of that strategy.

The
ERA was re-introduced in Congress every year since 1983 to re-start the
process entirely, most recently in 2010. This Start-Over Strategy
would require a two-thirds majority in both House and Senate, the
re-ratification by the 35 previously ratified states, plus ratification
by three more.

A
spokesperson for previous sponsor Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said
that she plans to introduce the ERA in this Congress "soon." A
spokesperson for previous sponsor Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said by
email, "It looks like we are planning on re-introducing, but we don't
know when yet."

"We
don't want [the Start-Over Strategy]," said Hayden. "We are already
almost there. We have already proven that 35 states have ratified and
only lack three more states. [This would allow us] to move forward and
get [the ERA] into the Constitution so that women can be protected. It's
time we had equal rights."